Citaat | Raad van State 4 april 2018

Onder 6.7. Raad van State 4 april 2018

Een alinea uit Raad van State 4 april 2018, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:1152.

(…). 89. (…). (…), the applicant has not provided proof of any inconsistency on the part of the authorities in applying such a policy, either by showing that neighbours in a similar situation have been exempted from the obligation to demolish their house or by referring to any overriding higher interest, be it architectural and/or dictated by a concern to protect the national heritage. 90. The Court notes, further, that the applicant refused the compromise solution and the prefect’s proposal to continue enjoyment of the house subject to conditions. (…). It did not seem an unreasonable offer, (…). 91. (…). (…) considering that the applicant could not have been unaware of the principle that no compensation was payable, which was clearly stated in every decision issued since 1961 authorising his temporary occupancy of the public property (…), the lack of compensation cannot, in the Court’s view, be regarded as a measure disproportionate to control of the use of the applicant’s property, carried out in pursuit of the general interest."

Zelf controleren

Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/2bfcfd2da913aaf85103c9962c880e551ea3cbd632a44a8cb0cf5d06fbdae422. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt 2bfcfd2da913aaf85103c9962c880e551ea3cbd632a44a8cb0cf5d06fbdae422, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 192584 tot 193666.